Skip to main content

Same-sex couple Steven Bridges (L) and Michael Snell exchange rings after filling out a marriage license at the City Hall in Portland, Maine December 29, 2012.  Same-sex couples can start marrying on December 29 in Maine, a state that made history on Elec
According to most polls, a majority of Americans now support marriage equality. But it turns out that's not the only good news to be gleaned:
The national trend using all surveys asking opinions on same-sex marriage also suggests that the majority of Americans now supports same-sex marriage.  In fact, in the past year, the change in support has increased more rapidly than ever. [...]

This has important implications for where public opinion is headed. If the stable linear trend were the right one, then by 2016 just over 56 percent of the public would be expected to support same-sex marriage. However, the accelerated trend predicts that support for same-sex marriage will be about 5 points higher by 2016. It is appropriate to infer that opinions are trending positively and changing exponentially as time goes on.

Flores also suggests that the change is too rapid to be taking place due to generational shifts—it has to be happening because previous opponents are changing their minds. And that might be the best news of all.

Originally posted to Hunter on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 11:39 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  People look at Iowa, Massachusetts (23+ / 0-)

    and other states and see that marriage equality has not led to the Death Of The Republic, or even plagues of frogs, locusts or interior decorators. ;-) Plus, as more people personally know gays and lesbians who are in long-term committed relationships that have lasted longer than any of Newt Gingrich's marriages, it only makes sense to give them the same protections under civil law even if their church might frown upon same sex marriages in their sanctuaries.

    There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

    by Cali Scribe on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 11:49:48 AM PDT

    •  Speaking of Newt, he's now fighting the rearguard (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mannie, risasperson, Calamity Jean

      defense on this.  He recently said marriage equality was going to destroy the nation, but it would take many decades before this result became clear.

      •  What they're scared of (3+ / 0-)

        is the dissolution of standard gender roles -- which have already been dissolving as women take bigger roles in the workforce while men take on a bigger role in the home with child-rearing, meal planning/cooking, etc. I watch a lot of the shows on HGTV (maybe too many if you ask Mr. Scribe), and I'm still amazed at when couples are looking at kitchens or discussing remodeling plans, it's the man who does much of the cooking so he's the one who wants the gourmet kitchen with the gas cooktop and double wall ovens. But how do you know who is the dominant in a relationship with two men or two women?

        There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

        by Cali Scribe on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:37:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Post-2012 he kind of supported it. (0+ / 0-)

        Accepted that it was inevitable, knowing that come 2014, even more states would have it. The next day NOM shot out that "traditional marriage got far more support than Romney!" and Newt was back to being anti-gay marriage again.

        It is hilarious how the anti-gay crowd once proclaimed that every state that has debated SSM has voted it down in referendum, and now it boasts how the vote was closer-than-expected in a deep blue state.

      •  Translation (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tennessee Dave

        "I'll be dead by the time my prediction is rendered true or false, so I can say whatever I want without repercussion."

        "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." --General Dwight D. Eisenhower

        by risasperson on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 05:16:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Can't increase exponentially... (5+ / 0-)

    ...since there is a limit to how high support can get.

  •  The World War II Generation is dying out (5+ / 0-)

    They were constantly bombarded in their lifetimes to fear several things:  a weak America vis-a-vis our defense spending, communism, homosexuality, etc. Communism and homosexuality were often linked, most notably in the case of the conservative ex-communist who outed Alger Hiss, Whittaker Chambers, being himself an "eggplant" (self hating gay man equivalent to an  "oreo," "coconut," 'banana," "apple," etc.).   The WW II vets and their spouses saw that the concept homosexuals were security risks was perfectly rational, as they were at risk of blackmail, but there was something visceral about it, too.  In the 19th Century LGBTs were often viewed as sinister nefarious people like would-be world conquerors, but by the 1920s that had morphed into effeminate sterotypes.  Plus, the mass mobilization of WW II actually led to the establishment of the first nationwide gay groups as people found themselves in service together in the war.  

    Baby Boomers are somewhat less affected.  I remember in 1968 as a high school junior a lot of cotroversy over a student who was said to be a lesbian.  She was a short, short-haired nondescript girl with a bad case of acne and said to be an item with a quiet plump girl.  A friend was heard gossiping about it by the one with the acne, who, bless her soul for her courage way back then, reported her to the Dean of Women, a somewhat unloved administrator (the principal and vice-principal were men) who was often called the B-word and the story was two vocational agriculture students welded the Dean's garden gate shut.  Turned out that this Dean of Women had a surprisingly liberal attitude for the time.  She told my friend, a sweet heavyset girl in the drama club with me who gave our group of misfits status because she was the sister of a cheerleader and a football player, that the girl in question was indeed a lesbian and the Dean of Women had directed her to basically leave the girl alone and shut up about it.  Like my friend who was the overlooked one in her family of stars, I changed my view of that Dean of Women and of LGBT people in general from that.  

    To people from generations after the boomers, that must sound incredibly quaint, but that's how it was.  Culture changes in many ways but generrationally is probably the most widespread and most effective.    

    The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

    by Kangaroo on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 12:25:00 PM PDT

    •  I have never heard "eggplant" to mean that (0+ / 0-)

      although I am aware of it being racist slang for a black person in some communities.

    •  one correction (6+ / 0-)

      During those times homosexuals WERE a security risk because they were easy to exploit (in relative terms).  Since you were not "supposed" to be gay you had to hide it.  Since you were hiding something if it could be discovered you could exploit that.  

      Long before the recent change in attitudes we adjusted on the security side.  We stressed that anything you hide was bad and anything you admitted to was good.  Since you had admitted it, you couldnt be exploited.  It created some really contorted reasoning to let people officially admit to something that could not then be used against them officially so it also couldnt be used against them unofficially.  

      Also during that time it was FAR easier to exploit a straight person over an affair than a homosexual person over denying their life.  Give me a straight guy with money problems AND a wandering eye and I will own him in a week.

      It was never about the sex, it was always about hiding something you were not supposed to be doing.

      It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

      by ksuwildkat on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:34:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think that's a fair assessment (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sfbob, Cofcos, Tennessee Dave

        I'm a civilian employee of the military and can attest that that's what's up with the security training they're putting out these days.  

        The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -- John Kenneth Galbraith

        by Kangaroo on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:39:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •   Gosh. The world didn't end. (10+ / 0-)

    Fancy that, Edna.

    ". . .as singularly embarrassing a public address as any allegedly sentient primate ever has delivered." - Charles P. Pierce

    by Rikon Snow on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:17:48 PM PDT

  •  I find this hard to believe (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mannie
    it has to be happening because previous opponents are changing their minds.
    Because most of the folks I know who are firmly against gay marriage are completely out of their minds about it. There is no way they'd change their minds, they'd have to find them first and that seems a stretch at best.

    Another thing that I wonder about, do we have a state by state breakdown on the numbers? If places with gay marriage (like Washington and Massachusetts) are getting more open and places without like Texas are creeping towards acceptance we still might be a long way from turning more states. The trouble with national averages is this country is hardly uniform.

    Food processed to be nothing more than simple starches with two dozen flavorings and stabilizers added to make it appear to be food isn't "food". It's "feed" -- what you give to livestock to fatten them up for slaughter.

    by ontheleftcoast on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:20:11 PM PDT

    •  Some people, the true religious fundies, will (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BobBlueMass, sulthernao, mmacdDE, Cofcos

      likely never change their minds, what they have of them.  But others are not that strong in their beliefs and will go along with the crowd. Plus once it is no longer an election plus for the GOP, they will limit their propaganda and pandering to anyone other than the extremists.  Already more moderate Republicans are coming out in support, giving others the cover to do the same.

      “The future depends entirely on what each of us does every day.” Gloria Steinem

      by ahumbleopinion on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:27:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I dunno, you have to have a serious bug up your (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tennessee Dave

        backside to work up enough hate to deny marriage rights to other people. That doesn't seem like a casual kind of hate. And if it was then what does that say about people who hate because it is "popular"? Did they really change their minds or are they still just going along with the crowd?

        Food processed to be nothing more than simple starches with two dozen flavorings and stabilizers added to make it appear to be food isn't "food". It's "feed" -- what you give to livestock to fatten them up for slaughter.

        by ontheleftcoast on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:33:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  You've also got the reasonable religious (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ebohlman, Calamity Jean

        who, while they might not be in favor of same-sex marriages in their church, can see the difference between their religious beliefs and civil marriage laws. There are probably churches that don't marry interracial couples either -- but they can't stop those couples from getting a license and marrying anywhere else they please.

        There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

        by Cali Scribe on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:40:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  There was a huge mushy demographic (11+ / 0-)

      who would say they wanted "equal right" but somehow put the word "marriage" on some pedestal that they just weren't willing to share.  The Clintons did this.  John Kerry and Barack Obama pretended to do this while they were running for President.

      But then Massachusetts took the word off its vaunted hetero-only platform and the world didn't end.  Then Ellen Degeneres more or less inherited Oprah's audience of women who are home in the middle of the afternoon.  And she was just so so fucking normal that they loved her.  And she just called Portia her wife, when it came up in conversation and little by little, those folks realized that her being married to a woman was just like their own marriage to a man.  Along the way lots of nieces and nephews came back from college with some big news to share with the family over break.....and for a third time, the world did not end.

      So they became willing to share their precious word.
      Yes, minds were changed.  Not the minds of fanatics, but lots of minds of the casually closed-minded and selfish.  

      "Unrestricted immigration is a dangerous thing -- look at what happened to the Iroquois." Garrison Keillor

      by Spider Stumbled on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:36:54 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  But lots of people were kinda meh about it (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cofcos, roycej

      It didn't affect them, so they went with whatever the prevailing views were.

      The majority was against it, so they were too, since it didn't much matter to them one way or the other

      As the views change, so do they. They also might know somebody who's LGBT, since it's not such a deal anymore, when they didn't think they did before (but likely they did, just didn't know it)

  •  Normalization (10+ / 0-)

    Whadda ya know--friends, coworkers, neighbors, sons and daughters, cousins, aunts and uncles have come out of the closet, and they're what?--Normal people! Not the subversive ogres of wild imaginations of yesteryear.

    Fifteen or twenty years ago--maybe even ten if I'm feeling generous--I could've excused wrongheaded though well-meaning opposition to marriage equality. I can understand that something unknown to many might be mysterious and frightening. Today though? There is just no excuse for such bigotry, and I'm tired of being told (I'm looking at you, Andrew Sullivan) that I need to be patient and compassionate and engage the haters, as though I'm the one who has to explain myself.

  •  Wow, it was more accurate than most of my snark (0+ / 0-)

    so I'll still call it a success by that measure.

    Interesting article, thanks!

    Food processed to be nothing more than simple starches with two dozen flavorings and stabilizers added to make it appear to be food isn't "food". It's "feed" -- what you give to livestock to fatten them up for slaughter.

    by ontheleftcoast on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:28:03 PM PDT

    •  Ooops, posted comment to wrong tab! n/t (0+ / 0-)

      Food processed to be nothing more than simple starches with two dozen flavorings and stabilizers added to make it appear to be food isn't "food". It's "feed" -- what you give to livestock to fatten them up for slaughter.

      by ontheleftcoast on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:28:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  That trend will slow down. (4+ / 0-)

    There is a hard core 30% opposition to equality.  Even if that 30% is disproportionately old, opposition to gay rights is not going to continue declining.  We've won over most of the people that can be won over.  We'll hit a ceiling of about 70% in a few years and then crawl to 75%.

    "Unrestricted immigration is a dangerous thing -- look at what happened to the Iroquois." Garrison Keillor

    by Spider Stumbled on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:29:04 PM PDT

    •  I don't think it matters. (5+ / 0-)

      If 70% will support it, the rest doesn't really matter.

    •  Yup, most likely. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      librarisingnsf, Cofcos, Calamity Jean

      Too bad we can't have this kind of polling dominance with bigger issues like income inequality.

      First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

      by Cream Puff on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:45:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  30% of people are against reality, no surprise (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cofcos, Calamity Jean

      they would be against marriage equality, too.

      “The future depends entirely on what each of us does every day.” Gloria Steinem

      by ahumbleopinion on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 02:19:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We should be there now. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      glitterlust

      That's the part that bugs me. It shouldn't have taken this long to get just this far. We should have been over 50% by the late nineties. I guess this is why I'm so angry. I feel like America has had it's adjustment period on this issue. It was called the nineties. We should have risen over 60% ten years ago. Yes, the cap for the next decade or so will be around 70%. Until some of the older haters die off, we're just stuck with that. But I think we should have gotten there long before now. Society is far too slow towards accepting changes.

    •  Ireland's already at 75% nationwide (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      with under-30s getting close to 85%.

      I suspect 85% is the highest we'll ever get; I don't think it's really possible for the population of a country with hundreds of millions of people to get a higher agreement on any issue unless it's become a platitude (I doubt that the proportion of Americans who think that motherhood, apple pie and baseball are all Good Things is much higher than 85%).

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 08:10:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Nate Silver believes it's the linear trend (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf, Calamity Jean

    And that it alone guarantees gay marriage in the long run, regardless of what the Supreme Court ends up ruling. It's hard to argue with it given that polling has shown that a clear majority of Virginia is pro-SSM, and opinion is split evenly in states like Utah or Texas.

    Obviously, it doesn't mean that these states will suddenly get gay marriage. They have constitutional amendments banning it, and repealing them would require their gerrymandered legislatures to act. Without the lawsuits succeeding, it could be a long wait.

    •  They don't have to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean, bananapouch1

      All they have to be told is they have to recognize legal marriages performed elsewhere.

      And that's coming. It has to. For the Supreme Court to say otherwise would open an enormous can of worms, and I doubt they want to do that.

      •  That will come. (0+ / 0-)

        Right now there are absurd situations where married couples file their federal taxes jointly, but their state taxes separately. That's why you get ideas like the "State Marriage Defense Act", which would force the feds to refuse to recognize marriages of couples living in states that do not accept them.

        It's the one part of DOMA which still survives which gives us this nonsense.

  •  Doom on Republicans (6+ / 0-)

    Every day they oppose this they look more mean and evil.  

    "I dont want you to be happy!" is tough to campaign on.

    Hate happy gay people.

    Hate well fed poor people.

    Hate well paid working people.

    Hate people who dont have cars.

    hate people who have cars that dont pollute.

    Hate sick people getting drugs from plants.

    Hate people who want to see a doctor.

    Hate happy people smoking the wrong plants.

    Hate people who dont believe in God

    hate people who believe in the wrong God.

    hate people who believe in the right God the wrong way.

    Hate people who vote.

    Hate people who are not white.

    Hate most old people.

    It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it. Robert E. Lee

    by ksuwildkat on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:42:10 PM PDT

    •  You have to wonder how many doing the hating (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calamity Jean

      would fit into one or several of the categories they harbor so much hatred for. "Keep the government off my Medicare....free speech means saying what I want about anything and everyone else shutting the hell up...my loving god tells me that the poor are lazy and the rich should be coddled and emulated (and where the hell is my SS check?)"...on and on and on.

      When it gets down to it, fostering this sort of cognitive dissonance through hate is all the GOP has.  

  •  The fact that minds are being changed should give (3+ / 0-)

    us all hope on a myriad of issues, that yes, it is possible to change peoples minds on things.

    Imagine the most profound idea ever conceptualized occupying this space. Now expect exactly the opposite. You'll never be disappointed.

    by Gurnt on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:43:25 PM PDT

  •  While the term "exponential" (0+ / 0-)

    could be technically accurate, since the rate of mind-changing likely depends on the absolute number of happy gay couples an individual knows, it's a bit misleading.  

    Support won't be growing at this rate for much longer just as a function of mathematics. Saturation effects will come into play once the % gets well above 50 percent.  Each successive increase will likely become harder to come by.

    Also, I hate to be a damper on the enthusiasm, but generic polling questions like this miss the salience factor.  In other words, it matters how much supporters and opponents care about the gay marriage issue.  For an extreme example, see the NRA-sponsored recalls in Colorado.  Gun nuts cared enough to show up for a special election in a state senate race.  The majority who supported the laws stayed home.

    My estimate is that gay people themselves tend to care most about the issue, followed by political activists on the left and human rights campaigners.  Then you have the close families of gay couples, then everyday folk who haven't given it much thought but don't have a problem with it, then those who haven't given it much thought but find it icky, then those who fervently oppose it on religious and/or bigoted grounds.

    While the slider may be moving forward along the large swath of the population that occupies the quasi-ambivalent middle, it's also where the issue is least likely to affect the segment's vote selection and motivation to turn out.  This also explains why Republicans cling to near-electoral parity despite being on the losing demographic and polling ends of many of these issues.

    I'm still happy the needle has moved so far so fast, of course, but I don't expect an electoral windfall from it.

    First they came for the slippery-slope fallacists, and I said nothing. The End.

    by Cream Puff on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:44:51 PM PDT

    •  There's some preliminary evidence that (0+ / 0-)

      the salience gap is closing. The big factor is probably that a lot more people know that they have gay family members and close friends. This makes the issue "concrete" rather than "abstract" to them: previously support was justified on the basis of "it's nobody's business but their own", a pretty abstract reason; now it's justified by "if something happens to her partner, it's not acceptable that my niece won't be recognized as a parent of her kids", which is pretty damn concrete.

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 08:23:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  When I was growing up back in the 60's and early (9+ / 0-)

    70's homosexuality was considered a perversion, period, even among many of those who were supposedly progressive or liberal. It is wonderful and amazing how much we have progressed since then.

    I give most of the credit for this progress to the gay community for coming out of the closet and showing us all how human and how decent most of them are. They avoided what I think would have been a disastrous trap by rejecting the separatist ideology and instead taking their rightful place as valuable members of society as a whole.

    You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

    by MikePhoenix on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 01:45:39 PM PDT

    •  And never forget (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sfbob, MikePhoenix, Cofcos

      the contribution of the drag queens, whether they were gay, bi or straight. Their self-assertion and self-confidence were a critical component to getting the gay community motivated and active in the struggle for civil rights back in the late 60s and 70s.

    •  Well, not to quibble, but ... (0+ / 0-)
      I give most of the credit for this progress to the gay community for coming out of the closet and showing us all how human and how decent most of them are.
      I'm pretty sure everyone in the gay community is human.

      Not sure what you mean by "most of them are decent," either, but it's an unfortunate turn of phrase because back in the day, there was this idea that if the drag queens, faeries, and generally "non-conformist" folks would stop "scaring the straights," we'd get equal rights more quickly.  It was a dumb idea that got all the pushback it deserved.

      So yeah, I think we're all pretty decent, as well.

      Likewise, I don't know exactly what you mean by the "separatist ideology" either but that's too much to unpack in a comment.

      •  Sorry, I was trying to express a positive view (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        riesling

        about the gay community. My apologies if it didn't work for you. Let me try to explain my comments further.

        I have no doubt that everybody in the gay community is as human and decent as everybody in the straight community. Sadly, in both communities there are some real douchebags. Do you really like all your fellow gay people? I generally like or can at least tolerate most people I meet. Sadly, there are a few who are just total a-holes and sexual orientation does not prevent anyone  from falling into that category.

        There was definitely some lesbian groups in the 80s and 90s who were separatist and wanted nothing to do with anybody who wasn't a lesbian. One of our local radio personalities has stated she was a part of such a movement and I have seen flyers for such groups in years past. Fortunately they didn't catch on with most members of the LGBT community.

        You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

        by MikePhoenix on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 04:24:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Also, when I was saying you SHOWED us all how (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          riesling, Darmok

          human you were, I really was not trying to suggest a lack of humanity on your part, but rather a lack of understanding in the straight community.

          You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment.

          by MikePhoenix on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 04:28:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks for the explanation (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          MikePhoenix

          And I should have added that I understood that you were coming from well-meaning, positive place with your comment.

          There is more complexity in those issues, especially the "separatist" issue you've identified, but probably best left for another time.

  •  I grew up (5+ / 0-)

    In a really small rural town and went to a southern Baptist church... I'm not proud to say that I held some strong prejudices toward gay people...

    But I'm definitely one of those people whose mind has been changed.  

    I'm still just about as conservative as they come, but I can't imagine denying two consenting people anything in life that would bring them happiness.  Similarly I can't imagine denying people equal recognition under the law.

  •  2016 Presidential... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rikon Snow, Cofcos, glitterlust

    There is no way that the Republican Party will nominate someone who is pro-SSM in 2016.

    The question is whether the Republicans will nominate someone who will be willing to give a non committal answer of something like "each state should decide for itself" (Jeb?)
    or is it someone withe a sufficient history on the matter that you will only get answers based in his belief on what the bible says (Huckabee/Cruz/etc.)

    I still wonder though, given the small state advantage in electoral votes, and the tendency for those older to vote, if 2016 is a single issue election:

    If you believe two men should be able to be married in your state you are voting for Hillary
    If you believe two men should not be able to be married in your state you are voting for Huckabee

    Who wins?

    •  If everyone were a single issue voter on this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ebohlman

      Specific issue and no other . . .  A little too hypothetical for me.

      ". . .as singularly embarrassing a public address as any allegedly sentient primate ever has delivered." - Charles P. Pierce

      by Rikon Snow on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 02:10:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Which is why they'll ratchet up the hate (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    librarisingnsf

    The Others know they've lost. They're fighting rear guard actions now. Like the "religious freedom" crap. The recent spate of those bills was not some random thing. I'm sure they'll pull something else out of their collective asses to try and "protect" themselves.

    And they will ratchet up the hate. Expect all kinds of hateful words and deeds. Even in Massachusetts friends of mine got nice friendly little notes stuffed in their mailbox or under their windshield wipers, 5-6 years after they were able to marry. Hateful anonymous things.

    The kind of hate that drives these people does not go away quickly or quietly.

    But, politically and judicially, game over.

    Peace on Earth was all it said.

    by BobBlueMass on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 02:10:25 PM PDT

  •  If I'm right, it's because reasonable people are (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob, roycej, Calamity Jean

    asking themselves, "Why not?" and can't come up with a good answer.

  •  Huh??? The author makes no sense (0+ / 0-)
    Flores also suggests that the change is too rapid to be taking place due to generational shifts
    I have no idea what Flores is talking about. This already is inter-generational. There's a great graphic floating out there that breaks down support for gay marriage by state and age bracket. Even though it's several years old, it shows that in all 50 states and DC, even in the deepest of red states, support for gay marriage is inversely proportional to age bracket and will be in the majority in every state in the not too distant future. Kids simply don't have the same hangups that adults do.

    "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed." --General Dwight D. Eisenhower

    by risasperson on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 05:12:41 PM PDT

    •  He means that it's too rapid to be accounted (0+ / 0-)

      for purely or even predominantly by generational shifts; there's at least as much movement within generations as between them.

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 08:28:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There was an international poll conducted in 2013 (0+ / 0-)

        Aside from finding support for same sex marriage rising across the countries they polled, they found that 32% of respondents stated that their opinion now was different than it had been 5 years ago. So there's your explicit evidence.

  •  That's good news no matter how it happens. On (0+ / 0-)

    a different note:  I just love that picture of these two guys so happy and smiling every time I see it posted.  I can't tell you why, but it makes me smile as well.

    “My soul is from elsewhere, I'm sure of that, and I intend to end up there." - Rumi

    by LamontCranston on Fri Mar 14, 2014 at 05:48:38 PM PDT

  •  I'm sure I'm repeating what many have said (0+ / 0-)

    more eloquently already, but the takeaway is that the GOP and the holdouts on gay marriage are obviously on the wrong side of history, and the tide is only pushing them further from the mainstream. The last few years have seen so many victories, and I have no doubt there will be more and more, until this is no longer an issue in a civil, legal sense. There will inevitably be setbacks, which the bigots will crow about and attempt to frame as "proof" that America is staunchly against gay marriage....which is of course laughable now. I'm reminded of an article in the NYT a year or so again about young anti-marriage equality advocates, and even they seemed to know that they are tilting against windmills in the long run.

    Almost 50 years after Loving v. Virginia there are sadly still plenty of people who reject or look down on interracial marriage, and we've seen all too often just how far we have to go on racial issues in general. I expect it will be similar with regard to gay marriage and LGBT rights. But the direction of history on this issue is clear.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site